EB Online EDU v2.0 - RELEASE!

[-Stormrage-]

First of all I apolagize i failed to mention that the slingers i used WERE one chevron. The shield value Is Insignificant in this matter , becuase as i said a couple of times before i was shooting from the right side and from the backs of the units, so the shield value isnt counted. The Right side of a unit is the side with NO shield. I repeat 4 units of slings attacking one armoured unit from the side and not one casualty after the first or second volley! is that "deadly against armoured unints" ?

[Kival]

I will have a look at your replay, but my experience differ from yours.

[vartan]

Sorry Robin I will fix that typo. I don't know what I was thinking.

Storm, you're not supposed to hit the side with no shield, rather hit the side with shield. The engine is broken and horribly misprogrammed in more than only this regard.

[-Stormrage-]

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now i know why I,ve been Doing so badly lately.

[Kival]

Storm, you're not supposed to hit the side with no shield, rather hit the side with shield. The engine is broken and horribly misprogrammed in more than only this regard.

Really? Is this true for both missile units and melee?

[vartan]

Really? Is this true for both missile units and melee?

If I remember correctly, yes. I would view Aradan and phalanx_man's guides at the TWC for verification.

Updated proposals (new listing in EDU and Factional sections; corrected typo).
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&p...0NzQ0&hl=en_US

[Kival]

First of all I apolagize i failed to mention that the slingers i used WERE one chevron. The shield value Is Insignificant in this matter , becuase as i said a couple of times before i was shooting from the right side and from the backs of the units, so the shield value isnt counted. The Right side of a unit is the side with NO shield. I repeat 4 units of slings attacking one armoured unit from the side and not one casualty after the first or second volley! is that "deadly against armoured unints" ?

I've viewed the replay and connot really see the problem. You reduced one unit of neitos from 80 to 55 with a few volley of your 4 slinger units. Your first attacks were against your enemies slingers but later when you attacked the neitos and had a free path you killed a lot of them. Not in the first two volley but the later ones were very effective. How deadly do you want slingers to be? Archers have an attack of 3-5/6. Slingers should not have an attack as high as archers, so you could rise the attack value to perhaps 2 and 3 for the normal slingers but higher would be inapproriate. Most of them are not trained troops and they are so cheap i would not agree to increase their attack. And if you increase their attack it should be only increased by one.

[gamegeek2]

The system is bugged, it was discovered that shield value applies from the right side but mostly not from the left. It makes no sense and was probably a programming error on the part of CA, likely due to a confusion of attacker vs defender perspective.

My preferred solution (to slingers) would be to reduce sling accuracy and raise sling attack somewhat. That would require editing the projectile file, though.

Kival your proposal for Boii as a factional makes no sense. The Boii domains are hundreds of miles from anything the Aedui or Arverni ever controlled. The Bataroas are plenty powerful.

[vartan]

Kival your proposal for Boii as a factional makes no sense. The Boii domains are hundreds of miles from anything the Aedui or Arverni ever controlled. The Bataroas are plenty powerful.

Noricum was pretty far from Aedui/Arverni domains as well. Yet they are factional. The Kluddacorii are within Aedui/Arverni domains, yet they aren't factional. Perhaps the EB site was a good place to start, but clearly we haven't considered updating the factional lists or reviewing them to any significant extent.

[antisocialmunky]

I would make them do more damage but shoot slower. You can load and fire arrows pretty fast since everything is linear but loading a stone into the pouch and getting slings up to speed would take some time.

[Kival]

Kival your proposal for Boii as a factional makes no sense. The Boii domains are hundreds of miles from anything the Aedui or Arverni ever controlled. The Bataroas are plenty powerful.

If it is about aedui-domains you could not inculde noricum spearmen, too. And celtic axemen were also not used anymore in the region of modern french. Belgae are not part of the Aedui and centrals of boiis in northern italy (not represented in eb and perhaps a few decades earlier) and east of the alps are not really more away from the aedui than norricum.

The problem is if you watch averni and aedui just as averni and aedui you'd need to shorten their factional list drastically.Therefor I would propose a view of aedui and averni as mainland celtic in core and give them a possibility to have more diverse armies. Sure, botraos are great but they are also very different from the boii swordsmen. The swordsmen have more armor, which is somewhat useful in some situations. I would also give them the possibility to use galatian units (which is not possible?) and Lugii, Galathraikes, Cordinau Orca at least as mercenaries. I think it would make to much work to include them all but I would not exclude eastern celtic units from the roster.

The problem is that there is no concept in the factional unit composition of the two celtic factions from the mainland. I will accept a concept not including the boii but I'd like to see any concept at all here.

[vartan]

There do seem to be many incoherencies like that. As I said, we need to reconsider our approach. I don't really know what the basis was for the factional unit lists on the EB site, but they tended to include units both within and without the factions' domains.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Vartan is it even possible to give Median Medium Cav to Hayasdan? They already have their own version of the medium cavalry in addition to the generic Medium Eastern Cavalry which is classified as a mercenary unit. I was under the impression that a faction could only have two units which shared the same model (one being labeled a merc unit) and AFAIK they cannot recruit Medians in the campaign.

[Lazy O]

What is the problem with slingers? I can use them to murder HA or general units alike, they are sniper squads with MG 42's and a laser guidance system.

[vartan]

Vartan is it even possible to give Median Medium Cav to Hayasdan? They already have their own version of the medium cavalry in addition to the generic Medium Eastern Cavalry which is classified as a mercenary unit. I was under the impression that a faction could only have two units which shared the same model (one being labeled a merc unit) and AFAIK they cannot recruit Medians in the campaign.

I don't know, to be honest. Frankly, I would just forget Medians as the Hai. They don't go together. As you said, the Hai have their own medium cav in addition to the generic eastern one which has the same overhand spear and axe.

[Aulus Caecina Severus]

What is the problem with slingers? I can use them to murder HA or general units alike, they are sniper squads with MG 42's and a laser guidance system.

Yes, sometimes they seem to be clearly better than every archer units. They kill too easy the armoured units.

[vartan]

Yes, sometimes they seem to be clearly better than every archer units. They kill too easy the armoured units.

That's because that was their purpose, what they were meant to fulfill...

[Kival]

If you're improving the elites, you should consider to improve Cordinau Orca accordingly to the solduros. At least in their unit description they are described as comparable with the solduros. And I'm not exactly sure, what to think about

They are famous for their use of sheering curved swords that can open wide gashes on an opponent, particularly when used by the fearsome Carduci tribe, who are most famous for them

They have less lethality than longwords. If that is apropriate why were they famous for opening "wide gashes on an oponnent"? It sounds as if they were stronger than longswords (which would be normal for gauls?) in some way but I'm not exactly sure, perhaps it's just a language problem.

My second point is, that it makes no sense that cretan archers are factional for the ptolies but they get the mercenary version as unit?

[antisocialmunky]

Yes they should be better because they are long sword armed, chain mail clad, giant dolphins with eye spots.

[gamegeek2]

If you're improving the elites, you should consider to improve Cordinau Orca accordingly to the solduros. At least in their unit description they are described as comparable with the solduros. And I'm not exactly sure, what to think about



They have less lethality than longwords. If that is apropriate why were they famous for opening "wide gashes on an oponnent"? It sounds as if they were stronger than longswords (which would be normal for gauls?) in some way but I'm not exactly sure, perhaps it's just a language problem.

My second point is, that it makes no scence that cretan archers are factional for the ptolies but they get the mercenary version as unit?

By the same token the Seleucids should get them as factionals as well...I don't think either should get them, and neither should Makedonia.

I may just stat it as a longsword. As it is, it's +2 atk and .175 lethality. The reasoning behind this is that the single-edged swords produced in Central Europe by the Germanics and some celts costed a fair bit less to make, but were typically shorter than longswords and overall somewhat less impressive. Therefore they are much cheaper, but only a little bit less effective in melee. I need to apply this to the Korodrougos and I haven't. That was my bad.

If you want the Cordinau Orca's swords to be better, expect a price increase as well.

[Kival]

Yes they should be better because they are long sword armed, chain mail clad, giant dolphins with eye spots.

I do not get it. Is that sarcasm?

By the same token the Seleucids should get them as factionals as well...I don't think either should get them, and neither should Makedonia.

I did not say, they should be factional; in fact they *are listed as factional" for the ptolies but they get the mercenary unit version of them. That does not make sense. It's okay for me to say, they're not factional but than they should not be in the list and if they are factional they should get the proper unit version. It's not very important (are their any stat differences?) and I'm really looking forward to your new version!

I may just stat it as a longsword. As it is, it's +2 atk and .175 lethality.

That's a possibility. The Hypaspistai use the same stats, too, although I do not believe that they really used longswords. On the other hand it's perhaps better to let it stay "+2 atk and .175 lethality" as it's a better representation of the difference between their swords and the longsword. I'm not sure.

EDIT: Now you have edited your post and I need to change my anwser, too. Your reasoning makes sense for me but I'm not a historian so I don't know if it is correct. I just wondered about the stats (originally 1.2!) which did not really correspond to the unit description.

If you want the Cordinau Orca's swords to be better, expect a price increase as well.

I've never used them until now, as Aedui cannot use them at all (until now). I just stumbled over it.

[vartan]

This is why I hate edits. I don't mind adding to the post count, though. Yes, Cretans are slightly higher defense if mercenary. Perhaps they should be...mercs for whoever is within reach of them, and factional only for KH, I think.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Could the Baktrians gain access to Subeshi archers? They are available to recruit in two of the neighboring provinces to Baktria and are also a redundant unit, being only available to the Saka yet being the exact same as Saka archers. Giving them to Baktria might actually find a use for them.

[Lazy O]

We the Saka beg to disagree, while we do indeed neighbor you stinky greeks, our archers are simple better, and are what make us unique, if the geeky voice in the sky begs to differ, he should make them mercenaries for the Stinky greeks.

[antisocialmunky]

I think Ptoly gets factional Merc Cretans due to the geopolitics of 272 with their support of the southern Greeks. I don't think its that big of an issue ans Syrian archers fill a similar role and are less likely to get nerf batted due to being particularly annoying.

[vartan]

Could the Baktrians gain access to Subeshi archers? They are available to recruit in two of the neighboring provinces to Baktria and are also a redundant unit, being only available to the Saka yet being the exact same as Saka archers. Giving them to Baktria might actually find a use for them.

Thanks for mentioning that. I didn't spot that one myself. We're looking at the new posts here for suggestions so keep them coming.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Thanks for mentioning that. I didn't spot that one myself. We're looking at the new posts here for suggestions so keep them coming.

Maybe both the Eastern Light and Medium Cav's for Pontus as factionals. I don't see them listed on the site.

I also noticed that Hetairoi Aspidophoroi are listed as heavy cav only for the Ptolemaoi on the site. For all other factions they are not considered heavy cav.

[antisocialmunky]

Cap HA arrows at 35.

[gamegeek2]

Giving Baktria Subeshi archers would be entirely illogical, unless at some point Baktria controlled the Tarim basin.

[-Stormrage-]

Ok.lets take this conversation in a completely different direction. I want Mercs to be taken completely out of EB MP. I cant put it any simpler then this, so i hope you understand. My Reasoning is as follows: Without Mercs Factions will have more Differentiation and Each faction will be Unique. Right now Factions are Quite Similar. Furthermore , When you face your opponent you want to have units Unique to you, The problem is their is no ownership for the factions. I mean WHY THE **** do Romans have Gallic Troops, YOU ARE PICKING ROME its completely absurd for you to see Gallic Soldiers in your roster, what is this a 2-in-1 deal . Even more Furthermore(lol), The Description of each faction is wrong when mercs are used. for example: A Faction like saka might be described as having superior Cavalry and Weak Infantry, but when you see Saka's Roster you see many Infantry ,Why? i thought they were Weak in the Infantry section they shouldnt have many infantry. Without Mercs Factions would be more uniwue, for example the Faction that has those Thracian Skirmishers as Factionals , should be the only faction with thracian Skirmishers hence being unique to having the best skirmishers. but Now many factions can get Thracian Skirmishers so its no big deal. in other words if each faction had its own factionals all to itself , Factions wil have a clearer border between them, for example bosphorans the best archers in the game should only be in Pontus's faction, Thus when people pick pontus they now that they can pick the best archers and no one else can it makes pontus special for having best archers. Gallic factions would have units all to themselves rome. Those Thracians should only be available to macedon , that will make them distinguished maong the other factions as having superior skirmishers.this conludes my case.

Edit: examples
1)romasn should be weak in archers but in game they have cretans,why? that completely takes away the advantage KH had over ROME. Pontus has Bosphorans as their fationals that is their advantage good archers, but you took away their advantage so when KH fights agaisnt pontus both have BOsphorans in their rosters and both have the ability to get bosphoransm,so that inturn removes the advantage pontus had over KH.